LHO EndX measurement made today.
python3 generate_measurement_data.py --WS "PS4" --date "2024-09-23"
Reading in config file from python file in scripts
../../../Common/O4PSparams.yaml
PS4 rho, kappa, u_rel on 2024-09-23 corrected to ES temperature 299.3 K :
-4.711436365635769 -0.0002694340454223 4.121866697713714e-05
Copying the scripts into tD directory...
Connected to nds.ligo-wa.caltech.edu
martel run
reading data at start_time: 1416675755
reading data at start_time: 1416676330
reading data at start_time: 1416676692
reading data at start_time: 1416677299
reading data at start_time: 1416677800
reading data at start_time: 1416678168
reading data at start_time: 1416678360
reading data at start_time: 1416679388
reading data at start_time: 1416679723
Ratios: -0.46161620922202573 -0.46631546727413287
writing nds2 data to files
finishing writing
Background Values:
bg1 = 9.175134; Background of TX when WS is at TX
bg2 = 5.161980; Background of WS when WS is at TX
bg3 = 9.165405; Background of TX when WS is at RX
bg4 = 5.151518; Background of WS when WS is at RX
bg5 = 9.191307; Background of TX
bg6 = 0.664785; Background of RX
The uncertainty reported below are Relative Standard Deviation in percent
Intermediate Ratios
RatioWS_TX_it = -0.461616;
RatioWS_TX_ot = -0.466315;
RatioWS_TX_ir = -0.456051;
RatioWS_TX_or = -0.461524;
RatioWS_TX_it_unc = 0.086881;
RatioWS_TX_ot_unc = 0.091151;
RatioWS_TX_ir_unc = 0.097094;
RatioWS_TX_or_unc = 0.089816;
Optical Efficiency
OE_Inner_beam = 0.988013;
OE_Outer_beam = 0.990086;
Weighted_Optical_Efficiency = 0.989049;
OE_Inner_beam_unc = 0.060350;
OE_Outer_beam_unc = 0.060428;
Weighted_Optical_Efficiency_unc = 0.085403;
Martel Voltage fit:
Gradient = 1636.718975;
Intercept = 0.130679;
Power Imbalance = 0.989923;
Endstation Power sensors to WS ratios::
Ratio_WS_TX = -1.077666;
Ratio_WS_RX = -1.392000;
Ratio_WS_TX_unc = 0.054228;
Ratio_WS_RX_unc = 0.043548;
=============================================================
============= Values for Force Coefficients =================
=============================================================
Key Pcal Values :
GS = -5.135100; Gold Standard Value in (V/W)
WS = -4.711436; Working Standard Value
costheta = 0.988362; Angle of incidence
c = 299792458.000000; Speed of Light
End Station Values :
TXWS = -1.077666; Tx to WS Rel responsivity (V/V)
sigma_TXWS = 0.000584; Uncertainity of Tx to WS Rel responsivity (V/V)
RXWS = -1.392000; Rx to WS Rel responsivity (V/V)
sigma_RXWS = 0.000606; Uncertainity of Rx to WS Rel responsivity (V/V)
e = 0.989049; Optical Efficiency
sigma_e = 0.000845; Uncertainity in Optical Efficiency
Martel Voltage fit :
Martel_gradient = 1636.718975; Martel to output channel (C/V)
Martel_intercept = 0.130679; Intercept of fit of Martel to output (C/V)
Power Loss Apportion :
beta = 0.998895; Ratio between input and output (Beta)
E_T = 0.993960; TX Optical efficiency
sigma_E_T = 0.000424; Uncertainity in TX Optical efficiency
E_R = 0.995060; RX Optical Efficiency
sigma_E_R = 0.000425; Uncertainity in RX Optical efficiency
Force Coefficients :
FC_TxPD = 7.886467e-13; TxPD Force Coefficient
FC_RxPD = 6.173183e-13; RxPD Force Coefficient
sigma_FC_TxPD = 5.464959e-16; TxPD Force Coefficient
sigma_FC_RxPD = 3.784130e-16; RxPD Force Coefficient
data written to ../../measurements/LHO_EndX/tD20241126/
Beam Spot
T1500062 procedure measurement and log
Martel
WS @ TX
WS @ RX
WS @ RX Both_BEAMS
LHO EndX PD report
Git Link: https://git.ligo.org/Calibration/pcal/-/tree/master/O4/ES/measurements/LHO_EndX/tD20241126?ref_type=heads
Lab measurements:
NOTES:
PS4 PS5 measurement used for the above measurement were made on 2024-09-23.
The Measurements done in the PCAL LAB today 2024-11-26 were significantly different from the last set of measurements. Due to a drop in the voltage reported in the following plots.
https://git.ligo.org/Calibration/pcal/-/tree/master/O4/lab/measurements/t20241126_144208_PS4_PS5_FB?ref_type=heads
https://git.ligo.org/Calibration/pcal/-/tree/master/O4/lab/measurements/t20241126_160713_PS4_PS5_BF?ref_type=heads
And I will need review these further before re-running the ES data with these newest measurements.
This maybe due to some changes in the lab. More vetting time is needed.
Ratio measurements t20241126_144415_PS4_PS5_FB and t20241126_160713_PS4_PS5_BF agree with preceding measurements within 0.02%, as seen in the top plot of the attached figure.
Top plot show the mean of each responsivity ratio measurement distinguished by the power sensor position from the laser: device_1_front/device_2_back (FB, red) or device_1_back/device_2_front (BF, blue). The error bars indicate the standard error over the mean. The rest of the plots show the mean voltage of each measurement, also separated by FB from BF. Note the change in voltage by the OFS offset from 81135, as indicated by the vertical dotted line 2 weeks before the measurement. As expected, changes in laser power did not affect the final ratio.
We should use the lab measurements intended for this ES measurement.
TITLE: 11/27 Day Shift: 1530-0030 UTC (0730-1630 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 156Mpc
INCOMING OPERATOR: Ryan C
SHIFT SUMMARY: Busy but easy maintenance day followed by a fully automatic, albeit longer than usual, lock acquisition. H1 has been observing for almost 3 hours now.
LOG:
Start Time | System | Name | Location | Lazer_Haz | Task | Time End |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
16:10 | TCS | Camilla | Opt Lab | n | Retrieving beam profiler | 16:16 |
16:13 | FAC | Richard, Jordan, Ken | LVEA | n | Walkabout | 16:55 |
16:14 | CAL | Tony, Dripta | PCal Lab | n | Retrieving equipment for measurement | 16:21 |
16:17 | TCS | TJ, Camilla | EY | YES | Table measurements | 17:54 |
16:23 | CAL | Tony, Dripta | EX | YES | PCal measurement | 19:15 |
16:28 | FAC | Kim | FCES | n | Technical cleaning | 17:05 |
16:35 | ISC | Fil | CER | n | Swapping 35MHz LO | 16:38 |
16:52 | ISC | Daniel, Vicky | LVEA, EX, EY | - | Adjusting laser temps | 17:48 |
16:55 | FAC | Christina | LVEA | n | Property checks | 17:09 |
17:00 | SEI | Jim, Neil | LVEA | n | Swapping seismometer | 17:17 |
17:04 | FAC | Eric | n | Running fire pumps | 17:56 | |
17:06 | FAC | Kim | LVEA | n | Technical cleaning | 18:24 |
17:09 | FAC | Christina | MY | n | Looking for crates | 17:44 |
17:12 | CDS | Marc, Jackie | EX, EY | n | Checking power supplies | 18:27 |
17:27 | VAC | Travis, Janos | EX, EY | n | Checking vacuum pumps | 18:09 |
17:53 | PSL | RyanS | CR | n | PSL rotation stage sweep | 18:09 |
17:55 | ISC | Daniel | LVEA | n | Retrieving scope at PSL racks | 18:09 |
17:57 | VAC | Jordan, Gerardo | EX, EY | - | Installing vacuum gauges | 19:15 |
18:12 | ALS | TJ | CR | n | Testing ALS alignment w/ Y-arm | 19:29 |
18:16 | PEM | Lance | LVEA | n | Checking accelerometer cable | 18:33 |
18:24 | FAC | Kim | EX | n | Technical cleaning | 19:47 |
18:27 | VAC | Janos, Fil | LVEA | n | Roughing pump installation | 19:20 |
18:43 | FAC | Tyler | MX, MY | n | 3IFO checks | 19:23 |
19:03 | CDS | Marc | EX | n | Installing fan | 19:32 |
19:06 | VAC | Gerardo, Jackie | LVEA | n | Looking at flanges | 19:28 |
19:16 | CAL | Tony | PCal Lab | n | Returning equipment | 19:35 |
19:30 | OPS | TJ | LVEA | n | Sweep | 19:47 |
19:36 | TCS | Camilla | LVEA | n | Retrieving power meter | 19:39 |
21:51 | CAL | Tony | PCal Lab | n | Measurement | 22:46 |
23:58 | CAL | Tony | PCal Lab | n | Measurement | 00:04 |
TITLE: 11/27 Eve Shift: 0030-0600 UTC (1630-2200 PST), all times posted in UTC
STATE of H1: Observing at 155Mpc
OUTGOING OPERATOR: Ryan S
CURRENT ENVIRONMENT:
SEI_ENV state: CALM
Wind: 9mph Gusts, 7mph 3min avg
Primary useism: 0.02 μm/s
Secondary useism: 0.31 μm/s
QUICK SUMMARY:
Closes FAMIS28381
The in-lock charge measurements did not run this week due to the IFO losing lock from an Earthquake.
Now that I have the function working pretty well for my liking (testing from last week - alog81420), I wanted to try it out in a few different scenarios and see how well it performed and how long it took. I also wanted to compare it to our current Increase_Flashes state both in duration and execution. The big changed from last week's testing is that now that we have a working PSL, the PLL and PDH loops are locked. This seemed to really help out and it seems like a very viable solution for a faster alignment state.
SA = Scan Alignment IF=Increase Flashes, all flashes from H1:ALS-C_TRY_A_LF_OUT_DQ | ||||
Alignment method | Misaligned from starting point | Initial max flashes | Final max flashes | Duration (min:sec) |
Test 1 - Warm up, check function with PDH&PLL locked | ||||
SA | ETMY, TMSY, P&Y various amounts | 0.25 | 1.0 | 5:20 |
Test 2 - Larger misalignment, comparison | ||||
SA | ETMY, TMSY, P&Y +2.0urad | 0.35 | 0.99 | 8:40 |
IF | ETMY, TMSY, P&Y +2.0urad | 0.35 | 0.93 | 11:45 |
Test 3 - Smaller misalingment, comparison | ||||
SA | ETMY, TMSY, P&Y -0.5urad | 0.83 | 1.06 | 4:05 |
IF | ETMY, TMSY, P&Y -0.5urad | 0.83 | 1.03 | 5:15 |
Overall, Scan_Alignment seems to work well and in these tests it was faster. I haven't put the functionality back into Scan_Alignment to hold and alignment if it get above threshold, so once I can test that out again it will speed up the smaller misalignment scans. Saving a few minutes for every acquisition that needs some alignment work should add up pretty quick. If given more time next week, I'd like to test this some more with that functionality and see how much faster it is. I'd love to get this into production soon, but I really want to thoroughly test this.
Last week Jenne had to comment out an import of aslArmconfig out of ALS_ARM.py in order for ALS_XARM to run (alog81424). This was a bit odd to me since this file contained info for both arms, and should be fine. I ended up restarting ALS_XARM and this worked. Seems like another case of issue 22. This particular issue is seem in the sei guardians frequently.
The 35.5MHz was switched from the Marconi (IFR2023) to the LHO 35.5MHz RF Source. Temporarily switched to the Marconi as part of troubleshooting of the PMC, see alog 81277. Both the PMC and SQZ were taken down prior to switching the RF signal.
Due to limited maintenance time between diagnosis and action, we triaged the fan failures with IFO uptime. The following solution while not perfect is just good enough to get us to next Tuesday maintenance.
1 - Failed supply fan on CER-C5 LHS ISC-R2&R4 +24V is runnning at 90F front and rear, no airflow. The ambient air in that location is very cool, and the current draw is quite low, so we do not expect this supply to trip in these conditions. Fernando noticed that the -24V supply on the same rack is also slightly elevated in temperature and does not have good air flow, so we suspect this supply fan is comprimised as well. Neither of these supplies have had their fans upgraded yet.
2 - Failed supply fan on EX-VDD-1 ISC-R1 +24V 3A was running at 110F front and rear, no airflow. This supply has not had its fan upgraded yet. The PCAL team was using this supply so we could not replace it before close of maintenance window. We applied supplementary cooling to the power supply to see it through until next Tuesday. After supplemental cooling we measured 85F front and 95F rear.
The power supply tray had to be pulled out about 1 foot into the walkway to make space for the supplemental cooling, I placed cones around the hazard, be mindful of the extended rack tray if you do go out to EX berfore next Tuesday.
J. Figueroa, F. Mera, M. Pirello
Maintenance activities have finished, the LVEA has been swept, and initial alignment has just finished. Starting lock acquisition now.
H1 is back to observing as of 21:43 UTC.
Had one lockloss at TRANSITION_FROM_ETMX which knocked the BS out of alignment, so MICH_FRINGES was needed to lock DRMI. Otherwise a straightforward, fully automated relock.
Prior checkups:
13 August 2024 ALOG79537
14 May 2024 ALOG77832
7 May 2024 ALOG77686
19 Sept 2023 ALOG72968
EY Power Racks
VDC-C2 U35-U33 +12V ISC-YC1-TCS; minor stumbling vibrations detected, good airflow
VDC-C1 U19-U17 +/-18V PCAL; minor stumbling vibrations detected, good airflow
EX Power Racks
VDD-1 U24-U22 LHS ISC-R1 +24V; no vibrations, no airflow, 110F front, 110F rear, front meter 27V, 3A, measured 24.5V. (BAD FAN)
CER Power Racks
C1 U39-U37 RHS SUS-C8 18V 6A; no vibrations, 90F front, 115F rear
C5 U7-U5 RHS PSL-R1 18V 3A; minor stumbling vibration detected
C5 U11-U9 LHS ISC-R2&R4 +24V; no vibrations, 90F front, 90F rear, no airflow (BAD FAN)
M. Pirello, J. Figueroa
Tue Nov 26 10:01:33 2024 INFO: Fill completed in 1min 32secs
Very quick fill, only TC-A exceeded the -80C trip (-95C).
Following instructions in alog79596, I took the opportunity this morning to calibrate the PSL rotation stage since it hasn't been done following the most recent NPRO swap.
The measurement file, new calibration fit, and screenshot of newly accepted SDFs are attached.
Power in (W) | D | B (Minimum power angle) | C (Minimum power) | |
Old Values | 97.433 | 1.990 | -24.797 | 0.000 |
New Values | 94.944 | 1.990 | -24.793 |
0.000 |
Daniel, Vicky. We offloaded the TTFSS crystal frequency offsets of ~1.5 GHz to the temperature knobs on the laser controllers again, following the final successful swap to the O1 laser last week lho81426.
The initial to final laser crystal temperature we set on the knobs:
Recap of process:
From start (Sept 2024) to end (Nov 2024) of laser swapping saga:
Recent auxilary laser adjustments:
Bypass will expire:
Tue Nov 26 03:29:36 PM PST 2024
For channel(s):
H0:FMC-CS_FIRE_PUMP_1
H0:FMC-CS_FIRE_PUMP_2
This morning there was a range drop on H1 (163Mpc down to about 151Mpc, see attachment#1). Was working on trying to figure out how to run the Range Check measurements, but while chatting with Vicky on Teamspeak, she reminded me about the daily CP1 Fill can affect range (see attachment #2 which is plot from Dave's alog) ....and the effect certainly lines up! (Also see Oli's alog from Sept here.) The time in question is 1802-1812utc (1002-1012amPT). I will not share the Low-Range-Plots I took for 1810utc since CP1 Fill is most likely the culprit.
However, a note about the range is that it has not really returned to 163Mpc---it's hovered at 157Mpc post-CP1-Fill for the last 4+hrs.
So I ran another Low Range DTT for about an hour ago (2117utc/1317PT).
Attached plots show the 30 minutes around the CP1 overfill for Sunday and Saturday. The H1 range shows a correlation with the CP1 discharge line pressure. An increase in line pressure indicates the presence of cold LN2 vapor, and later liquid, in the pipe. The Y manifold accelerometer signal shows correlated motion.
The accelerometer correlation can also be seen on the previous Sunday. This is not seen clearly during the week because the ACC was nore noisy, presumably due to LVEA activity around 10am each day.
Attached shows ACC signal Sun 8th Sep 2024 correlated to the discharge pressure. Back then we were filling at 8am. It doesn't appear that the beam manifold motion has gotten any worse over the past two months during cp1 fills.
The attached plots shows the BNS range around CP1 fill times for the last six CP1 fills (10 AM PDT) when the IFO was also in the locked state. In four cases among these six, we can see BNS range drop during the CP1 fill. In the remaining two it is not clear whether CP1 fill happened or not. We see a spike in H0:VAC-LY_TERM_M17_CHAN2_IN_MA.mean, but we don't see an extened increase in that channel as we see in the other four cases.
The attached plot show the BNS range variations during the CP1 fill times during the first ~10 days of December. We are plotting only those days when the IFO was in observing (H1:GRD-IFO_OK == 1). For these days, the drop in the BNS range during the fill times seem lower than what we saw during November (plot in the above comment). We also see that the fill times are in general less in these ten days compared to what were in November. Maybe longer the fill time, more the drop in the BNS range!? Also looking at these plots and plots from November, it seem the range might be coming back to a lower value after the fill than it's value before the fill.
After the very successful PSL work this week, we're electing to not offload the temp changes for the ALS or SQZ lasers to their physical knobs tonight. This means that they all need Crystal Freqs of something near 1.6 GHz (1600 in the channel H1:ALS-X_LASER_HEAD_CRYSTALFREQUENCY). The new-ish ALS state CHECK_CRYSTAL_FREQ is written assuming that all the lasers have the changes offloaded to their knobs, so that the value in that channel is close to zero. After we went through SDF revert, we lost those values (and the search values, which Daniel has updated in SDF for the weekend), so we we lost the PLL lock of the aux lasers. The CHECK_CRYSTAL_FREQ state was 'fighting' us, by putting in candidate values closer to zero. I've updated its candidate values to be closer to 1600. Once we offload their temps to the knobs on their front panels (early next week), then we'll want to undo this change.
Current crystal frequencies: ALSX +1595 MHz, ALSY +1518 MHz, and SQZ +1534 MHz.
I have now reverted the change to CHECK_CRYSTAL_FREQS, so that when Daniel and Vicky are done offloading the temps to the front panels of the lasers, this state will still work.
Oli, Camilla WP12203. Repeat of some of the work done in 2019: EX: 52608, EY: 52636, older: part 1, part 2, part 3.
We misaligned ITMY and turned off the ALS-Y QPD servo with H1:ALS-Y_PZT_SWITCH and placed the Ophir Si scanning slit beam profiler to measure both the 532nm ALSY outgoing beam and the ALSY return beam in the HWS path.
The outgoing beam was a little oblong in the measurements but looked pretty clean and round by eye, the return beam did not! Photos of outgoing and return beam attached. Outgoing beam was 30mW, return beam 0.75mW.
Attached is the 13.5% and D4sigma measurements, I also have photos of the 50% measurements if needed. Distances are measured from the optic where HWS and ALS beams combine, ALS-M11 in D1400241.
We had previously removed HWS-M1B and HWS-M1C and translated HWS-M1A from whats shown in D1400241-v8 to remove clipping.
TJ, Camilla
We expanded on these measurements today and measured the positions of the lenses and mirrors in both ALS and HWS beampaths and took beamscan data further from the periscope, where the beam is changing size more. Data attached for today and all data together calculated from the VP. Photo of the beamscanner in the HWS return ALS beam path also attached.
Oli, Camilla
Today we took some beam measurements between ALS-L6 and ALS-M9. These are in the attached documents with today's data and all the data. The horizontal A1 measurements seemed strange before L6. We're unsure why as further downstream when the beam is larger and easier to see by eye it looks round.
Until we figure out these laser glitches, I've increased all of the timers in H1_MANGER and IFO_NOTIFY by 50%. This will hopefully help avoid the late night notifications that resulted in no actual interventions.
I added a laser_fudge = 1.5 to both nodes, and then multipled the defined timers in H1_MANAGER lines 149-152 and IFO_NOTIFY lines 30-35.
I've undone this timer increase in both H1_MANAGER and IFO_NOTIFY by changing laser_fudge from 1.5 to 1.0 since the IMC seems to have been behaving itself since the NPRO swap last week. Both nodes have been loaded.